Impact Assessment without a baseline

[Priya Anand]

This is a great opportunity to work closely with the Evaluation Team Leader and contribute to generating credible, gender-responsive evidence that informs decision-making and strengthens programme impact.

📍 Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh (home-based with travel to project locations)
📅 Apply by: 24 February 2026, 5:00 PM
🔗 Apply here: https://lnkd.in/gar4ciRr

If you are passionate about feminist evaluation, gender equality, and rigorous evidence that drives change (or know someone who is) please apply or share within your networks.

[Cecilia Manyame]

Thanks Prya for sharing thereby starting this very interesting discussion. I have learnt something from this. However, more importantly for me, I now understand, from this discussion, what was meant by colleagues, who are professional evaluators, when they argued that not every social scientist or professional who has evaluated development projects/programmes is an evaluator. This was said at the 2014 Africa Region Evaluation Association (AfREA) Conference.

From the responses you have received, it sounds like you would be better off using mixed methods, as well as the 'control' group of teachers that you suggested. The focus group discussions might bring in other factors that might validate findings from the other methods. As someone pointed out in this discussion, some desk research including any reports such as project/programme or field reports, might shed some light with regard to the methodology. Analysing the results against the original objectives and a SWOT(C)analysis might also help.

I hope that it is possible for you to share you experience after the impact assessment is done.

Cecilia

[Godfrey Bwanika]

Thanks for a very informative discussion but what about using the most significant change approach establish the effect of the teaching tool

[Priya Anand]

Thanks Esteban and Will for recommending Michael Bamberger's book. And to Isha, Sarah and Fanaye. Your suggestions are very valuable.

[William N. Faulkner]

Hello Priya,

Looks like you have enough to get started here, but I wanted to quickly add my voice as this is a topic of interest to me. Maybe just my lens, bit it seems I can still hear echoes of the great Randomista vs. Big Push Forwards debate (https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/so-what-do-i-take-away-from-the-great-e...). My favorite outcome of that whole era (now, thankfully, subsiding with a few nasty pockets of resistance) was the DFID paper which outlines the full range of potential impact evaluation methods (http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/Output/189575/), the counterfactual-based among them. P. 16-23 have a great birds-eye summary of the options out there. 

Regards,

William

[Rituu B Nanda]

Thanks to Deo- Gracias Houndolo from 3ie Delhi office for sending a response through email

Dear Rituu,

Thanks for posting this question. 
Technically speaking one can evaluate an intervention using a with - without approach. However findings from such a methodological approach would be biased and change that would be measured cannot be attributed to the intervention evaluated. Simply because without a baseline reference,  it is Simply not possible to effectively mesure the magnitude of effect induced by the teachers intervention. Please note that baseline data in the treatment group is not enough to limit biases but you also need baseline data in your comparison group. Hence baseline are necessary to measure effect that are attributable to your intervention. Otherwise,  just acknowledge that your results are about outcome evaluation. 
More need also to be covered with respect to identification strategy. 
In any case,  secondary data exploration could be a way to address the lack of baseline data in this case.

Best wishes, 
Deo.

[0w9tsc8blaqyh]

I was wondering if  it helps to measure dose dependent response. Here  change after  exposure to time to the tools- 6 months, 12 months, 18 months or 2years etc in addition to the  methods suggested

[3eojs5yj0d18m]

Time-series/longitudinal analysis will require data collected over a period of time among the intervention group. there is no baseline for sure but am not sure if any data has been collected during the 3 years of intervention.

[Elizabeth Negi]

Dear Priya,

I think you have all the pros and cons to conduct the impact assessment. I don't think the use of a control group of teachers alone will reflect the changes anticipated through the use of the tool.

I do think Participatory methods especially FGDs as already suggested will be the best option. Teachers/schools usually have past records of these may be a source of qualitative and quantitative data if objectives were set clearly at the start of the project

Elizabeth Negi